open discussion topic

Tue, 1 Mar 1994 17:28:26 EST

Dan Hickerson at Georgia made a good point . . . the problems noted are
not necessarily pervasive, nor specific to anthropology. Not a game Dan,
a curiosity to know just how many other people are sick and tired of some
of the things currently happening in academia . . . from having to spend
much of the introductory course time in remedial work on English language
and basic concepts (that should have been done in High Schools or earlier)
to department of sociology (occassionally anthropology too (that hire on the
basis of skin color, gender and age) . . . to a gross proliferation of
specializations that are really not anything new or different, but which
consistently devote efforts to recycling someone elses early ideas under
new names . . . to journal policies that restrict relevent materials in
the disciplines on the basis of the editors' or reviewers personal
perferences, rather than potential utility for disciplinary wide discussion
. . . to Dean's and states that try to decimate social science departments,
refuse to replace retiring positions, and attempt to eliminate who liberal
arts curricula. Not pervasive, HUH? Tell that to Dalhousie, Longbeach,
and a dozen others.
It is not a `little game' Dan . . . it is a general disgust with what
has been allowed to happen in American academics, and while it may not be
politically correct to be negative these days . . . the private response
show that there are one heck of a lot of our collegues that agree . . . far
more than are willing to state it publicly.
I am glad that you are not experiencing those kinds of problems in